TheFish

No, that pub's shut I'm afraid. I'm sure there's somewhere in town to get a good pint of Guiness. I guess, dunno never been a massive fan of the pint of the black stuff.

Have you watched much of us lately? We love the physical side of the game. Under previous managers we were too often a soft touch, but with Trippier, Joelinton, Schar, Bruno and Botman we're more than happy to throw our weight around. We're a big bunch of shithouses now. Shef Wed took their chances and our lot didn't. They 100% deserved to win and even after we brought on the big guns we couldn't put them away. Fair enough, but I think we'll be much more on it when Tuesday night comes around. Plus we'll likely be starting with our big guns, instead of resting them. Anyone needs pub advice let me know. Plenty of pubs within walking distance of the ground (over 100 I think). None are off limits to away fans as long as they don't act daft. If you're getting there by train there's a few good pubs near the station (Forth, Town Wall, or if you're after a bigger space with likely more away fans the Mile Castle), closer to the ground you've got Rosies, the Trent, Shearers (in the ground) and obviously the Strawberry will be packed. If you're driving I'd park at the Metro Centre (just off the A1, free cctv-ed parking and plenty of food options for the way back. Park in the 'Blue' Car park which is dead close to the little train station) and jump on the short train across the river. Hope any and all who're braving the travel, the weather and the daunting climb up to Level 7, have a good time regardless of the game.

Yeah he didn't have a great final season at Sociedad, but I had a dig into what happened at his previous club a bit more and I learned he was shifted away from his preferred central striker position to accommodate Sorloth. That meant he wasn't the focus of the attack any more, fewer good chances, compounded by a lower conversion rate. But throughout his career when he has been played as the main striker, he's getting about 0.5 goals a game. This with various scout reports and the like, this all shows that he's clearly got promise. He's only played about 242 minutes and scored twice (should have been 3, but dodgy offside, Refs are rubbish and Liverpool are cheats, I'm not bitter you are). I'm very excited to see what a fully fit Isak will bring to Newcastle.

I've watched him week in and week out for nearly a year now and I can, hand on heart, say he's in the conversation for the best midfielder we've had in the PL era. He has so much to his technical game, so assured on the ball, great vision. He'd 100% get into a combined squad ahead of Tielemans and while they do a different job I'd have him ahead of Ndidi as well. He's consistently been performing well and that's backed up by his performance metrics, his recognition in the national press and his call up to the Brazilian squad. Botman, Bruno, and Isak will form the spine of the next few years. 22-25yrs old and only going to get better.

Will do.

Always fascinating to read opinions of Newcastle from fans of other clubs. Not sure I agree with everything said, comparing Bruno to Drinkwater is a borderline hate crime. The thing about Burn at LB, it means Trippier can bomb on down the right flank and Burn tucks in a bit as a 3rd CB. Willock or Joelinton play as an ersatz LWB, the other plays further forward as a pressing wide midfielder/forward. Only really works properly with those two players ahead of him. Stick ASM there and... well... no. Not so much.

It's not a binary thing. Yes we're spending money, but spending money isn't the chief reason for our current 'success'. I'd also argue that 12 of the current PL teams have bought a player for £35m+, so £38m isn't wildly out of whack for the top flight and the point I was making was that those players weren't out of reach for other teams. They weren't cheap, but those transfers weren't particularly eyebrow raising, were they? The Saudi regime is vile and no foreign state should own an English Premier League side, and certainly not them. The PL, the FA, and the UK government could have stopped it at any point, but they didn't, so here we are. I'd be shocked, and disappointed that we'd be left in their shadow in the not too distant future without a remarkable change in our fortunes. I was happy for Man City because their fans had long been without much to cheer about. I honestly couldn't care less about PSG. re: Sportswashing, I'm not convinced it works. I don't hold the UAE or Qatar in any higher or lower regard now that they've pumped money into those clubs. It's just late stage capitalism, isn't it?

A Newcastle fan's perspective here (and I'm not on the wind up or anything). The work Howe has done on the training ground and in the matches is unreal. We've gone from the most passive side in the league to one of the hardest pressing, from a team that gave up chances for fun to the meanest defence in the league. Shot shy and without creativity, now we're 3rd for goals scored and chances created. It's reductive to claim that's just down to the money. Yes, we've spent a lot of money on new players in the past 12 months, but Isak accounts for about a 3rd of it and he's only played 2 1/2 games. Players like Burn, Pope, Targett and Trippier were each signed for less than £15m. Burn was 3rd choice CB at Brighton, Pope had just been relegated, Targett was second choice LB at Aston Villa. Botman and Bruno were expensive at c£38m but neither were out of reach for other teams. None of them are on eye-watering wages either (well, in terms of PL players anyway). My point is, this isn't largesse, it's good recruitment. When you look at the Newcastle team, among the stand out performers so far are Almiron, Schar, Joelinton, and Longstaff. All were there pre takeover, most of them for reasonable fees. Howe's success isn't because he's added a £60m forward, a £40m midfielder and a £35m defender who are carrying the team. It's because he's a damn good coach and is getting a tune out of £3.6m defenders(Schar), £40m flops (Joelinton), and the Paraguayan butt of Jack Grealish's jokes (Almiron). As an aside, in the summer Newcastle (£122m) spent less than; Chelsea (£251m), Man Utd(£214m), West Ham(£164m), Spurs(£153m), Nott Forest (£141m), Man City (£126m) and Wolves (£123m). Our Net spend (£122m) was less than Chelsea (£210m), Man Utd (£205m), West Ham(£148m) & Forest(£135m). We're above all of them, bar Man City and if you look at the underlying performance metrics, we're there because of Howe.

I never really understood that deal. He was good behind a big targetman, for a 10th-17th placed team. Never really saw how he'd fit in your team.

Haven't West Brom, Shef Wed and Blackburn won more than you?

... do you know how many trophies Newcastle United have won?

We're doing that (Bruno), but there's a reason why Newcastle's owners think they can find a compromise for Maddison and with Eales and Ashworth in charge, it's neither naivety or stupidity.

Because just because you can afford to spend a lot doesn't mean it's a good idea to do that. Like you could buy a Mars Bar for £50 if you really want to. Also, spreading the cost is just good business. Most clubs do business that way, you lot still owe us £8m for Perez for example.

What are you talking about? We could spend a hell of a lot more without falling foul of FFP. Ashley kept us on an even financial footing, which means we've a great deal of wriggle room. That room will get even wrigglier when the new sponsorship deals are ratified.

Our managers have done that in the past too. Famously Pardew said, unequivocally, Carroll was not for sale.

Sets a precedent, doesn't it? We have to negotiate hard, otherwise we'll end up having to spend £80m on squad players. Same for you, you have to negotiate hard so people don't have your pants down.

Isn't getting shot of Deadwood making room? I've read multiple reports from multiple sources that say, quite clearly, that the story has legs. If there was no way you were selling, the story would already be over. There must be some signs of encouragement to keep Newcastle interested. Take Diaby for example, we were interested, we made a bid, they told us no and we moved on. Now, we're talking roughly the same figures, both players are highly regarded within and without their club so why did we move on so quickly from him and not from Maddison? I'm not saying Newcastle are definitely going to get Maddison, or that anyone will. I'm just saying the deal isn't dead, yet.

Exactly, the first bid was never going to be accepted but if we'd started at £75m, Leicester would rightly have seen that as weakness and demanded £90m. It's just setting the expectations. Despite our reported wealth, we're not going to be taken for fools. And your rejection is clearly saying 'neither are we'.

Sorry, that was meant to read "Honestly," not a question.

You did, because we were owned and run by a Dickens villain. Now we've got Bond villains. Have to say you've had the pants down of some pretty big clubs. Maguire, Drinkwater stand out, that's why Leicester are respected, you find a player and sell him on for profit. All the while performing well in the competitions. It's impressive work. The only trouble is when you sign a few players for not-insignificant fees, who don't kick on, then you're lumbered with them until you sell at a loss, or release. We had it with Cabella, Saivet, and up untiol recently Joelinton. You had it with Benkovic, Iborra or Silva.

We have the bloody Amazon out the back of St James' Darlow, Gillespie Manquillo, Fernandez, Lascelles (in my opinion), Lewis Murphy, Shelvey, Longstaff(s), Ritchie, + Clark, Hayden and Hendrick winding down their contracts on loan already.

Honestly? I think you're just being shrewd. You have an asset you're reluctantly willing to part with, but you don't want to set a precedent that you'll sell on the cheap. That's a terrible image to portray. It would be insidious and far reaching. You bat back a few low-ball offers, then accept a higher bid, you're not pushovers and you can demand high prices for other in-demand assets.

Possibly, but given their wealth is certainly capable of paying 'over the odds' for Maddison, you have to assume it's because they don't want him. Only if teams want to buy your deadwood. Getting rid of empty shirts isn't easy. Even harder to make money on it.

I think he's been a 10 for Lyon, but we'd probably have him deeper. Him and Bruno are just best buds.

That's what I'm saying, if the reported figure for the second bid is accurate, Newcastle are offering 33% on top of his market value. That £60m is an over inflated price. There certainly appears to be a perceived need for Leicester to sell. Sharks are circling for Maddison, Fofana, Tielemans, Schemichel, Barnes, Soumare. I just read something on The Athletic and it's reported that you have a big squad, not in Europe. That you need to sell before you buy, but your players are fairly well paid which is putting off suitors. Also, that you can't afford to have another big loss for fear of falling foul of FFP.